5 ms·
> why is gender even listed on a passport in the first place? That is a very valid question. We already have face-scans and fingerprint IDs so we are all trea
by shevy-java 1y ago
> why is gender even listed on a passport in the first place?
That is a very valid question. We already have face-scans and
fingerprint IDs so we are all treated as criminals. There is
indeed zero point to have a binary-toggle field where one has
to identify as either male or female. I'd like to add here that
I don't care about this field; or I would want to check that I
am an epic supergender, the very best - 'A' for awesome. But
they don't allow this, so I don't want to have to care about
this weird grouping I disagree with.
- broken-kebab 1y agoIt's pretty universal across all societies to allocate different rights, and obligations according to physical characteristics, and sex is probably the most important one. Though humans are very good at determining other humans' sexes in immediate communication there plenty of cases which are handled indirectly. Therefore documented sex is reasonably important bit of information
- Brian_K_White 1y agoSomeone asserted that a thing is done which has no rational purpose. You have observed that a thing is done, which was already observed. You have not explained in what way it has a rational purpose, or added to the conversation. It's not important. It's merely treated as important, which we already knew, because that was the setting for the question in the first place.
- veeti 1y agoIn the United States of America, the "draft" has historically applied to those categorized as "male". Today, the "Selective Service System" asserts that "Federal law requires nearly all male U.S. citizens and male immigrants to register at age 18". Likewise, many countries still enforce selective conscription by gender. You may not like or approve of these things, but they are part of the "purpose" you seek.
- Brian_K_White 1y agoThat's just another example of the thing, not a why. The bullets don't care who fires them or who they hit.
- broken-kebab 1y agoField military service is predominantly hard physical labor, so it's exactly an example "why"
- pandaman 1y agoBullets might not care but you would if you had been a woman and made to unload a truck of 40 lbs ammo crates. Also carrying 90 lbs of load out (some of which are also bullets) feels very different. You also seem to overlook demographic implications of sending 18 y.o. women to war or just keeping them from starting family. Especially during war time, when you already lose population.
- projectazorian 1y agoUnless you are an elite athlete I assure you that there are many women out there who can lift more, with better endurance, than you or I. If I had to choose to be in a foxhole with a fit 20 year old woman or a flabby 35 year old man, I'm choosing the woman every time. (Even the new, stricter, US military fitness standards are not that hard to meet for either gender)
- pandaman 1y agoStatistically there are very few women out there that can lift even same as an average man. Even a 55 y.o. overweight man is statistically stronger and has more endurance than an average 20 years old woman.
- projectazorian 1y agoThe US combat fitness standard is a 155lb 3-rep max deadlift. That's trivial for every woman I know who lifts.
- broken-kebab 1y agoNo, my claim that it's rational when an administrative procedure follows established norms is perfectly valid. You apparently believe that established norm is not good, and there could be discussion about it. Except you brought no arguments at all so far.
- Brian_K_White 1y ago"established norm" is not an answer to "why is this norm?". Yes we established that this is the norm in the opening question. You're answering "we do that because we do that"
- broken-kebab 1y agoIt really feels like you answering without reading cause you essentially repeated what I wrote to you